9 June 2001
by Sarah Yeh

National Civil Rights Convention
The asylum question was recently debated at the National Civil Rights convention in Leeds. Sarah Yeh went to the forum to gain an opposing perspective to much of the recent media smearing. Here, those issues were discussed by those fighting for their right to stay in this country, as well as the community workers and legal departments who are working with them. Most notably, there was a discussion on the practical measures that could be enforced to make this process more acceptable.

National Civil Rights Movement (NCRM)
The National Civil Rights Movement (NCRM) was set nearly two years ago as a result of the Lawrence enquiry. It initially worked with established minority families who were victims of severe racial abuse and racial murders throughout the country. In doing so, however, it soon realised that many asylum seekers were also subject to racial abuse and attack, but had less legal and social power to stand up against this.

The NCRM therefore examined the problems encountered by asylum seekers, and now work to support and defend them in the same way they had defended other victims of racial abuse. To their credit, they are one of the few organisations who have not succumbed to the politically agitated divide between minorities established in this country and those who are newly arrived.

Fighting for the common struggle of all victims' racial abuse, the NCRM have set up the National Civil Rights Caravan that tours round every city in the UK to contact and support groups and individuals dispersed throughout the country. They are also actively highlighting those in government and media who are trying to create a divide within ethnic minorities or who are being racist.

Legal Issues
There were many legal issues raised in this meeting. On the negative side, there were several changes in law that acted to the detriment of asylum seekers:

1. Immigration officers have now been given the same rights as police officers whereby they have the right to enter into premises using force. In addition, registrars have also been given the right to look into what they believe are suspicious marriages, and many genuine marriages have come under question as a result of ethnic background.

2. Practical issues also compounded legal problems in dealing with asylum seekers. Prior to October 2000, it had been public knowledge that immigration courts were to take roles as human rights judges. Therefore, many of the courts gave the relevant training, in the presumption they would deal with this when it was confirmed in October. However, after months of promoting this, the government pulled out a few weeks before October.

3. Topics also highlighted were the obvious failures of the dispersal and coupon system, as well as the problems of the refusal of asylum caused by asylum seekers often not having the right access to legal aid.

On the positive side, legal aid for immigration and asylum appeals was seen as a step forward as there had been none in the last 20-30 years. There was also encouragement for lawyers to take on such cases, but very few have adequate practical experience. Some immigration judges were becoming frustrated by the far right actions of the Home Office, and were compensating for their failures by leniency.

Political Issues
The weakness of support on asylum was seen as a result of the loss of many Labour supporters, many of whom were traditionally active campaigners, but had now moved in line with the more right wing policies of the government they supported. The Labour party was seen as being able to introduce far more oppressive legislation because they have such a large majority.

They were also able heighten the divide between the resident and new minority immigrants with the use of the Lawrence enquiry as their race credentials. Even Scotland Yard had admitted there was a rise in racist attacks when there were verbal attacks from politicians over asylum seekers.

Nevertheless, the economic reality of labour shortage had created some leniency towards asylum applications. As well as the obvious import of people with computer skills, there was one report of one individual being granted asylum, as he was a bricklayer.

Asylum seekers views
Many asylum seekers were present at the meeting and were able to give their perspective on the issue of asylum.

One asylum seeker called the relationship between the European countries and the Iranian government 'a great disgrace for humanity' and highlighted that western governments were 'aiding and abetting' many oppressive regimes to get into government. Although in many western countries, Iran was not seen as have such a power, he noted that 'women are stoned to death for basic human rights and youths were flogged after having a party to celebrate the New Year'.

He felt that many asylum seekers were victims of western policies, whether through failure to accept the oppressive nature of governments, or through the failure to stop war that been fought for many years in different countries: there was no western intervention as there is no economic incentive.

Many have money and are affluent in their own countries, helping others less fortunate than themselves. One asylum seeker had 3 houses in Iraq and had help people hide and escape political oppression. He had came to the UK as an illegal immigrant, but when asked for asylum was rejected. At this point tried to kill himself.

It was noted that although many asylum seekers had survived the torture and abuse of their own countries, they had always had hope - this had enabled them to survive. However, on rejection of asylum, faced with the prospect of being deported to their country, many felt that there was no hope left, and committed suicide. Many used protest tactics such as setting themselves alight, or sewing their lips together.

Community workers views
There were many problems encountered by those helping asylum seekers on a more practical basis. There were problems regarding solicitors. Not all solicitors have a full understanding into the political backgrounds and issues of a particular country. Although a course has been set up to cover basic legal problems encountered by asylum seekers, many did not know of its existence. In addition, there were language barriers that prevented asylum seekers from obtaining a greater legal representation.

Even on a basic level, local councils were failing to provide adequate food and cater to the dietary requirements of people from different countries. Out of date food was often used by ''ignorant privately run companies' who had been contracted to do the work. Many people were living and convening in sub standard conditions, and there were examples of people being thrown out of their hostels for failure to produce the necessary Home Office documentation.

Practical measures
In terms of practical solutions, there was an overall agreement that there needed to be more education to dispel the myths surrounding the asylum issue. Many asylum seekers are victims of the UK foreign policy there needed to be greater awareness and discussion about this. There also needs to be education to reduce the divide between established immigrants and those coming into the country.

There needed to be greater support for asylum seekers on a practical level, through access to education, the correct legal resources, recreation, translation, information on rights, women's groups, meeting places and health. The money given to the UK government for supporting asylum seekers should be used for this.

Only those whose applications were approved are integrated and supported by society. This was seen as detrimental and it was felt that integration should be for everyone, both those who are and those who are not accepted.

In terms of the NCRM and its caravan, members of the meeting expressed a need to strengthen and work collectively. To centralise resources and thereby facilitate the work of support groups around the country. A greater need to work not just on a local level, but also on a national level was highlighted.

Finally, it was agreed that there needed to be greater support from the UK for those in other countries and a worldwide solidarity against oppression for those in other countries, as well as a support of the prevention of deportation in cases of Iran and Iraq.

This conference proved to be a very thought-provoking introduction into the issues surrounding asylum. It was harrowing to hear so many individual stories of abuse experienced by people seeking asylum over here, as well as in their own countries. It upset me greatly to hear the extent to which the UK government are helping oppressive regimes, yet doing nothing to help its victims, Many asylum seekers are being treated as animals instead of humans, and denied even their basic human rights.

On a personal level, as one of many Chinese whose family fled from the Far East over the last fifty years, the convention also reiterated the divide in our community between those that are established here and those that are coming into the country.

It seems in comprehensible to me that we, as Chinese, are now turning our backs on people who were doing exactly the same as our parents or grandparents decades earlier. As established members of British society, it is all too easy to overlook the hardship and bravery of those who are seeking asylum today.

It is also easy to overlook the fact that these people do not come to undermine our position in society, but come because of a wide number of reasons. These may range from economic hardship, abuse, to war, famine, persecution and political oppression, and these are the factors that force them to give up their families and their livelihoods in their own countries.